On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:45:16AM -0700, carlopmart wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 11:42 AM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> > On 03/23/2011 12:20 PM, Rainer Traut wrote:
> >> Am 23.03.2011 11:09, schrieb Manuel Wolfshant:
> >>> if you examine certain packages you will notice that there are linking
> >>> differences between what SL ships and what RH ships.
> >> Can you give an example of such package/binary?
> > I can but I am not sure that I may. So I won't.
>> Then, why you say that without evidence?
My two cents are that if you have those stringent of requirements you'd
be using RHEL, anyways.
I'd be interested to hear an expansion on this a bit more. Claims or
no claims, SL is rebuilt from RHEL sources just as CentOS is. Are
there specific examples of ABI breakage introduced?
It would be great to see these two fantastic projects collaborate (and
I know they do to some degree already).
Ray